LX5 Processing

Started Oct 27, 2010 | Discussions
tinpusher
Senior MemberPosts: 1,224Gear list
Like?
LX5 Processing
Oct 27, 2010

I'm not sure what mode I was in when I took this but given an ISO of 400 I think it may have been IA that went to Landscape mode;just a guess on my part

Other shots taken at the time are fine so what do you think went on here?

This is my second LX5.

 tinpusher's gear list:tinpusher's gear list
Leica X1 Fujifilm FinePix X100 Canon PowerShot G1 X Sony RX100 Fujifilm X100S +6 more
Gregm61
Forum ProPosts: 13,838Gear list
Like?
Re: LX5 Processing
In reply to tinpusher, Oct 27, 2010

What are you thinking is wrong with the image?

From the direction of the light, it looks like a backlit scene and the camera opened up the shadows, maybe a little too much, which gives the file a flatter look....at least, it looks like that on the LCD I am viewing it on here at the office. I could see IA doing that. Had it been shot in regular program mode, shadows would have no doubt been darker, giving an overall contrastier look.

 Gregm61's gear list:Gregm61's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Olympus E-M1 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50mm 1:2.0 Macro Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 70-300mm 1:4.0-5.6 +10 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
tinpusher
Senior MemberPosts: 1,224Gear list
Like?
Re: LX5 Processing
In reply to Gregm61, Oct 27, 2010

It's the processing of the bushes that I find unacceptable.
Was it in focus?
Elements in front and beyond the bushes seem OK but the bushes are just smeared.

I don't know the answer but I do know that the LX5 can struggle to handle fine detailed objects at a distance.

 tinpusher's gear list:tinpusher's gear list
Leica X1 Fujifilm FinePix X100 Canon PowerShot G1 X Sony RX100 Fujifilm X100S +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
depscribe
Senior MemberPosts: 1,139Gear list
Like?
Re: LX5 Processing
In reply to tinpusher, Oct 27, 2010

there's nothing wrong with the picture. the slight fuzziness of the bushes near the water is due to the little dab of fog rising from the water, caught by the back light. this happens. it would be the case even if you'd shot it with a 4x5 instead of an lx5.
--
depscribe
some pictures: http://www.flickr.com/photos/depscribe/collections/

 depscribe's gear list:depscribe's gear list
Fujifilm X100S Nikon D7100
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
DezM
Forum ProPosts: 33,810
Like?
Re: LX5 Processing
In reply to tinpusher, Oct 27, 2010

The scene appears bright, so ISO 400 was unnecessary. The "film" was too sensitive to the available light, hence the overexposed, harsh exposure. ISO 80 or 100 would've sufficed.

EDIT: I just noticed the fuzziness of the distant trees. Not sure what went on there but I've read others had some issues with similar experiences. They suspected the mode of OIS.
--
Dez

http://photos.dezmix.com

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Detail Man
Forum ProPosts: 15,000
Like?
Re: LX5 Processing - Intelligent Resolution Effects?
In reply to tinpusher, Oct 27, 2010

tinpusher wrote:

I'm not sure what mode I was in when I took this but given an ISO of 400 I think it may have been IA that went to Landscape mode;just a guess on my part

Other shots taken at the time are fine so what do you think went on here?

This is my second LX5.

"IA" mode uses "Intelligent Resolution", right ?

LUMIX's new Intelligent Resolution Technology automatically identifies parts with outlines, detailed texture areas and soft gradation areas, and optimizes the edge emphasis on the outlines and detailed texture areas while using the Venus Engine noise reduction process to make the soft gradation areas smoother .
http://www.panasonic.asia/lumix/philippines/features/ir_technology/index.html

This is a processing technology used in newer Panasonic Lumix cameras which takes a more sophisticated approach to sharpening and noise reduction by separating the image into three types of area: outlines, detailed texture areas and soft gradations. Outlines are sharpened, detailed texture areas are moderately accentuated and soft gradation areas (like skies, for example), are smoothed rather than sharpened .

By separating these different types of detail and processing them differently, Panasonic hopes to achieve good detail without increasing image noise. Conversely, ‘Intelligent Resolution’ should provide lower noise at high ISOs without compromising on detail, particularly textured detail, which is usually the first casualty.

It’s not yet clear whether Intelligent Resolution offers a better noise/definition compromise than other processing systems, but it’s encouraging that manufacturers realize the issue needs addressing.
http://www.photo-facts.com/WP/archives/10500

Can't access the Original JPG with Exif and maker Notes meta-data in your gallery (you can change the permissions in your DPR Profile "Edit Profile"). With the Original available one could have a look at whether:

The detail of the foliage at such a distance from the camera may well be pushing a "pixel-ation" limit of the 10 Mpixel image-sensor. It's not unthinkable that (as a result) the "Intelligent Resolution" algorithm is interpreting these areas as "soft gradation areas", thus performing no sharpening in those areas. The amount of NR applied when "IR" (may, possibly) be increased (relative to the PASM NR). Thus, "no sharpening" (in such a case) in such areas may have more of an impact than PASM operation.

Your previous image of foliage seemed (to my eyes) to have some similar effects.

I have yet to see any of the suspected to be "uncharacteristically soft in certain places" LX5 images posted appear (to me) to have been caused by the OIS system.

To evaluate the basic optical integrity of the camera, (I, personally) would stay well away from "IA" mode . To allow the camera to "heap" robot-brains on top of the (already complex enough) window-dressing of the in-camera JPG engine makes for a soup of dubious variables.

Shoot in RW2 to evaluate the performance of the lens-system and image-sensor. Add "bells and whistles" (if at all possible) one at a time . Your answers can then be delivered by simple deduction.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Detail Man
Forum ProPosts: 15,000
Like?
Re: LX5 Processing - Intelligent Resolution Effects?
In reply to Detail Man, Oct 28, 2010

I tried down-scaling the exposure-level in your (Large version) image, but matters do not improve.

The Shutter-Time = 1/640 Seconds.

I think that it is more than "mist" and "back-lighting". The trees (along the edge of the body of water) look really, really bad (to me).

Noticed that in a post on another thread that you stated that you were liking using "Intelligent Resolution" at the highest setting as a shooting technique.

My theory is that this image (as well as your previously posted image of the foliage in a previous thread) demonstrate how poorly the results can come out with foliage (and any other very finely detailed subjects) at a distance when using "IR" ...

Do you have any examples of performance this poor when you are sure that "IR" is completely disabled?

If it is the "IR" causing this I (personally) would never use it again (particularly with landscape shots involving fine foliage detail) ...

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
tinpusher
Senior MemberPosts: 1,224Gear list
Like?
Re: LX5 Processing
In reply to depscribe, Oct 28, 2010

No fog

 tinpusher's gear list:tinpusher's gear list
Leica X1 Fujifilm FinePix X100 Canon PowerShot G1 X Sony RX100 Fujifilm X100S +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
tinpusher
Senior MemberPosts: 1,224Gear list
Like?
Re: LX5 Processing
In reply to DezM, Oct 28, 2010

I believe the camera chose this ISO I certainly didn't

 tinpusher's gear list:tinpusher's gear list
Leica X1 Fujifilm FinePix X100 Canon PowerShot G1 X Sony RX100 Fujifilm X100S +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
tinpusher
Senior MemberPosts: 1,224Gear list
Like?
Re: LX5 Processing - Intelligent Resolution Effects?
In reply to Detail Man, Oct 28, 2010

Thanks to everyone that commented.

I wanted the original with exif to be available so I must check the Gallery settings.

That is the worst picture I've had but smearing is visible on some shots where part of a texture ( brickwork ) is smudged and part remains sharp. Intelligent Resolution doesn't seem so good now.

Other shots taken at the same time are perfect

 tinpusher's gear list:tinpusher's gear list
Leica X1 Fujifilm FinePix X100 Canon PowerShot G1 X Sony RX100 Fujifilm X100S +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
MrClick
Contributing MemberPosts: 946Gear list
Like?
Re: LX5 Processing - Intelligent Resolution Effects?
In reply to tinpusher, Oct 29, 2010

Detail Man is correct. The others are wrong.

It is Intelligent Resolution causing this effect of smearing of the bushes which are in the less contrasty shadow areas i.e. where sunlight is absent.

Also, I'd advise you to shoot in RAW to obtain the highest degree of fine-detail capture. Else, if shooting JPEG, then choose the finest setting.

Switch off extended optical zoom (and digital zoom) too.

Switch off Intelligent Exposure or set it too Low if you do not PP your images.

Choose Standard Film and set the NR to -2. In fact, if you post process your images, you might as well set the other three settings (Contrast, Sharpness and Saturation) to -2 as well, else not.

With these settings, you will see that this smearing phenomenon is at its minimal.

Hope this helps.

......
Click

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
tinpusher
Senior MemberPosts: 1,224Gear list
Like?
Re: LX5 Processing - Intelligent Resolution Effects?
In reply to MrClick, Oct 29, 2010

Actually I think I know how to overcome the problem.

Intelligent Resolution isn't the cause ; it's partly the basic noise reduction processing so setting file modes to NR -2 helps.
Setting Intelligent Resolution to High can help .. not what I'd expected.

Overexposure seems to be the key to what has happened together with the softness at the 90mm end of the lens.

Actually , the smearing caused by NR appears on some RAW files so there's quite a bit of processing going on there too!

By dropping the NR to -2 my results are much better and I'm going to keep the camera for now.
Many thanks for everyone's comments ; they've all been helpful.

 tinpusher's gear list:tinpusher's gear list
Leica X1 Fujifilm FinePix X100 Canon PowerShot G1 X Sony RX100 Fujifilm X100S +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
MrClick
Contributing MemberPosts: 946Gear list
Like?
Re: LX5 Processing - Intelligent Resolution Effects?
In reply to tinpusher, Oct 29, 2010

I'd also like to add that Intelligent Resolution basically is a combination of NR and sharpening... low contrast areas have more NR applied to them. high contrast edges edges get sharpened a bit too. So imagery processed with the Intelligent Resolution look a big cleaner in low contrast areas and sharper overall.

Glad to know that setting the NR to -2 helped.

......
Click

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Detail Man
Forum ProPosts: 15,000
Like?
Re: LX5 Processing - Intelligent Resolution Effects?
In reply to tinpusher, Oct 29, 2010

tinpusher wrote:

Intelligent Resolution isn't the cause ; it's partly the basic noise reduction processing so setting file modes to NR -2 helps.

Note how little difference the LX3 NR = -2 setting makes compared to NR = 0:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicdmclx3/page8.asp
I wouldn't expect the LX5 to be much (if any) different.

Overexposure seems to be the key to what has happened together with the softness at the 90mm end of the lens.

Here is the Histogram of the entire image. It's getting "up there" in total exposure - but the amount of color-channel "clipping" is slight:

Here is a crop of the trees from the area just above and to the right of the fellow on the sailboard. Note that the Blue channel peaks at a level of 70 out of 255. That's a full 1.87 EV below the maximum level. Not what I would call "overexposed":

Actually , the smearing caused by NR appears on some RAW files so there's quite a bit of processing going on there too!

I have not seen any indication in the LX5 RW2s that have been posted that there is (any) "raw"-level noise-reduction going on. If you see smearing at that level you should look to the camera lens-system itself - and/or the "raw" processor itself. Silkypix is known to have limited spatial frequency resolution (even when the NR tools are not utilized at all) as compared to Lightroom ...

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Detail Man
Forum ProPosts: 15,000
Like?
Re: LX5 Processing - Intelligent Resolution Effects?
In reply to Detail Man, Oct 29, 2010

As I stated previously, the fine-detail of the foliage in the trees (may) be exceeding the ability of the 10 Mpixel image-sensor to resolve that level of detail.

The resultant "smearing" seen in this particular image may due to pixel-lation effects. What the "Intelligent Resolution" system may have done as a result of the loss of detail (and the corresponding loss of much of any "contrast" in such smeared details) is the question.

I would (if possible) take the same shot at the same place from the same distance under similar lighting conditions (with "IR" disabled) before drawing a conclusion that "IR" is not (at least part of) the problem - or assuming that "IR" has (in the case of this image) improved matters.

It just may be that RW2 is your best approach in such cases of highly detailed foliage at a distance. The best that (I see) the LX5 (in JPG mode) doing in similar images is providing an illusion of detail (mostly as a result of "sharpening"). Viewing at higher magnifications reveals the "smoke and mirrors" involved in that illusion (and not well-defined detail at such distances from the camera).

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Trevor G
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,466Gear list
Like?
Re: LX5 Processing - Intelligent Resolution Effects?
In reply to tinpusher, Oct 30, 2010

tinpusher wrote:

Actually I think I know how to overcome the problem.

Intelligent Resolution isn't the cause ; it's partly the basic noise reduction processing so setting file modes to NR -2 helps.

Partly correct.

There have been some weird answers to this query from folk who obviously either did not view the picture at a larger magnification, or don't realise that noise always affects the darker parts of the image first.

It is very obvious that the darker parts only of the image (the foliage in shade) have had excessive NR applied, which has smoothed away most of the detail. Ugly.

Turning NR to minimum is correct as the first solution.

Setting Intelligent Resolution to High can help .. not what I'd expected.

It's believable if some of the explanation provided by DM is correct.

Overexposure seems to be the key to what has happened together with the softness at the 90mm end of the lens.

The parts of the image which were blurred were not over-exposed. Over-exposure was very minor in this case, 1/3EV, and actually helps to reduce noise in shadows, because there is less area in shadow.

The "softness at the 90mm end of the lens" (if it exists) has absolutely nothing to do with the shadow blurring. The blurring is a very obvious, NR over- processing effect.

Any lens related issue affects both highlights and lowlights equally.

Actually , the smearing caused by NR appears on some RAW files so there's quite a bit of processing going on there too!

That is quite possible, too.

-- hide signature --
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
aerorail
Contributing MemberPosts: 663Gear list
Like?
Re: LX5 Processing
In reply to tinpusher, Oct 31, 2010

looks like ia to me
i wouldn't use that and stick to 'p' or other settings
set iso lower or lower iso auto setting
perhaps change to single point focus instead of multi
take a couple shots exposing for water then for sky etc

its digital takes lots and throw out what you dont like and/or pp different exposures

  • Exposure Time (1 / Shutter Speed) = 10/6400 second ===> 1/640 second ===> 0.00156 second

  • Lens F-Number / F-Stop = 40/10 ===> ƒ 4

  • ISO Speed Ratings = 400

  • Original Date/Time = 2010:10:25 15:11:02

  • Digitization Date/Time = 2010:10:25 15:11:02

  • Exposure Bias (EV) = 0/100 ===> 0

  • Max Aperture Value (APEX) = 20/10 ===> 2

Max Aperture = ƒ 2

  • Metering Mode = pattern / multi-segment (5)

  • Light Source / White Balance = unknown (0)

  • Flash = Flash did not fire, compulsory flash mode

  • Focal Length = 192/10 mm ===> 19.2 mm

  • Custom Rendered = normal process (0)

  • Exposure Mode = auto exposure (0)

  • White Balance = auto (0)

 aerorail's gear list:aerorail's gear list
RX100 III
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Faisalee
Contributing MemberPosts: 561Gear list
Like?
Seems like Extended ZOOM!
In reply to tinpusher, Oct 31, 2010

The quality seems to be a result of extended ZOOM... but I may be wrong! I never use JPG, almost all the time RAW

Shot in RAW f5.6 60s exposire, I will post some bushes later for you to check

-- hide signature --

Faisal.
Pentax Digital User
Nikon Digital User
http://www.flickr.com/photos/faisalee/

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads